On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 05:04:58PM -0500, Tim Mooney wrote:
> In regard to: Re: [Networker] Volume capacity?, George Sinclair said (at...:
> >Well, one reason would be that if on average you're getting 2:1
> >compression then NW will report the tape at 100% when it's only
> >written,  say, half of what it will end up writing, right?
> 
> That's true, but I guess I don't consider that a useful reason to change
> the default volume capacity.

The only thing the capacity figure is for is reporting, so what would be
a more useful reason to change it?

Tapes are always variable with compression involved.  I usually set mine
to a figure slightly more conservative than what I average on the
volumes.  

>  There's no guarantee that you're going to
> get 2:1 compression on any particular set of data, so why change the
> default volume capacity, assuming you will?  What have you gained by
> changing it?  Now you have some tapes that say "99% used" when they're
> full?

If the end of a tape is reached, %used goes to "full" regardless of the
amount of data written.

-- 
Darren

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and 
type "signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to 
networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this 
list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER